Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Show router canonical hostname on route page #1194

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 31, 2017

Conversation

spadgett
Copy link
Member

If the route has a custom hostname and the router has a canonical hostname configured, show a message on the route page about setting up the DNS CNAME record.

Fixes #336
See openshift/origin#12195

cc @knobunc

screen shot 2017-01-30 at 2 47 45 pm

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

@juanvallejo fyi

@spadgett spadgett changed the title Show router canonical hostname of route page Show router canonical hostname on route page Jan 30, 2017
@jwforres
Copy link
Member

hmm... I'm not sure i want this message there all the time, I care about it at the point where I need to go set up my CNAME, or if I'm seeing my hostname isn't resolving and I'm not sure why

@ajacobs21e @lizsurette any thoughts?

@ajacobs21e
Copy link

@jwforres Given that I do not understand what this message is telling the user... I agree that showing it at a time when the user can act on the message or to explain an error makes sense. Is this message something that otherwise the user would not care about or would not be able to act on? Is it implying that the user reading it is not also the DNS admin or that whatever setting needs to be changed cannot be done through OpenShift?

@jwforres
Copy link
Member

jwforres commented Jan 31, 2017 via email

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

@ajacobs21e You're telling your domain name provider that my-hostname.com is an alias to the OpenShift router (called a CNAME). It's a one-time setup outside of OpenShift.

@jwforres How about a "Don't show me again" link?

The other idea I had is to just have a "Router Hostname" field in the list with a tooltip explaining how to use it.

@ajacobs21e
Copy link

@spadgett is it possible that the user would actively decide to not set up a CNAME?

Showing it as an info alert that's dismissible is an option too

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

is it possible that the user would actively decide to not set up a CNAME?

Not if they want their route to work :/

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

Note that this only applies to routes with custom hostnames, but we only show the message for those.

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

Here's the alert style:

openshift_web_console

Or positioned above:

openshift_web_console

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

Another option:

openshift_web_console

@lizsurette
Copy link

@spadgett @jwforres @ajacobs21e I think the informational box treatment works best and I agree it would be nice to have a way to clear this message. How about just "Dismiss" as the text?

@knobunc
Copy link

knobunc commented Jan 31, 2017

@lizsurette "Dismiss" and "Don't Show Again" feel different to me. Dismiss feels temporary whereas "Don't Show Me Again" feels permanent (is there any way to get the information back once I've clicked that?)

@spadgett Something else to consider is that a single route can be admitted by two routers, each of which can have a canonical name set... Will you show the same box under each router that admitted the route?

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

@knobunc Yeah it will loop through and show each

@ajacobs21e
Copy link

I prefer the first option with the message under the route name.

If this is a setting the user will want / need to do in order for the route to work, should the message be able to be permanently dismissed? What's the use case for not fixing this? Because there might be a lag between asking the DNS provider to change this setting and it taking effect?

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

@ajacobs21e We have no way to know if it's been done on the OpenShift side, so we have to always show the message unless the user can dismiss it.

@ajacobs21e
Copy link

@spadgett ah makes sense. thanks for explaining. so the user could have already done all the CNAME setting stuff and still see this message.

@lizsurette do you think the action on the alert should be more "yes I understand" or "don't show again" ? I'm trying to think of something more succinct than "Don't show message again" but more permanent sounding than "dismiss"

  • remove message
  • hide message
  • accept warning / message

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

so the user could have already done all the CNAME setting stuff and still see this message.

yes, exactly

@lizsurette
Copy link

@knobunc Great point about dismiss. @ajacobs21e @spadgett maybe a mixture of something like "I understand, don't show again" It's a little long, but I'm thinking we can remove the "this message" since it's bounded by the box and very clear what it's referring to. Thoughts?

@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

OK, updated to this. Using the "Don't Show Me Again" text for now since it's what we say in other, similar alerts. Open to a better label.

@jwforres PTAL

openshift_web_console

If the route has a custom hostname and the router has a canonical
hostname configured, show a message on the route page about setting up
the DNS CNAME record.
@spadgett
Copy link
Member Author

is there any way to get the information back once I've clicked that?

@knobunc opened #1201 to let you reset hidden alerts

@jwforres
Copy link
Member

[merge]

@openshift-bot
Copy link

Evaluated for origin web console merge up to dd575bd

@openshift-bot
Copy link

openshift-bot commented Jan 31, 2017

Origin Web Console Merge Results: SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_requests_origin_web_console/995/) (Base Commit: 46c6d8b)

@openshift-bot openshift-bot merged commit e14b670 into openshift:master Jan 31, 2017
@spadgett spadgett deleted the router-canonical-hostname branch January 31, 2017 20:13
@Download
Copy link

Download commented Sep 29, 2017

@spadgett @ajacobs21e @lizsurette @knobunc

As an Openshift Online Pro user trying to set up a CNAME I'd like to chime in on this...

First of all, the message need not be dismissable. The piece of information it provides is vital. I'd go a step further and say it's maybe the most important piece of information on the entire page. Without it, setting up a CNAME is not possible, which means I won't be able to connect the host name to Openshift, which means my users will not be able to reach my application.

Second of all, in my humble opinion, the internal name, router.example.com in this example, should be a property of all routes that have a custom host name set. To be shown everywhere you show other info about the route. This is critical information.

Third, there really should be documentation about setting up a custom host name. There is none at the moment that I can find. Red Hat is aware of the importance of setting up a custom host name, which is why it's one of the features listed in the Plan Comparison tables here:
https://www.openshift.com/pricing
One but last entry in the Pro Plan table shows Supports Custom Domains. However, without knowing the Openshift internal domain name I should point my CNAME to, I am unable to complete the last step.

Last... This issue was closed on januari 31st, but I am not seeing this message on Openshift Online v3. I have an app deployed on v2 that I'm trying to migrate before the EOL but this issue is preventing me from doing so and it looks like my app will now suffer downtime because of this. I started late, I admit, but I reserved thursday, friday and the weekend as spillover for what I thought would be a simple migration...

Here is what I'm seeing in the Openshift Online v3 Pro Web Console when I inspect my route:

screenshot

In my humble opinion, this issue should be reopened to:

  • Make sure the internal Openshift host name is always shown for these routes
  • Make sure there is a specific documentation page about setting up custom host names
  • Make sure that the Route screen links to those docs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants